16 June 2011

Joanne Fraill has been sentenced to 8 months in prison for contempt of Court, by discussing the case in which she was a juror on FaceBook. How very noble and authoritarian it is for the judge to show no mercy to a woman such as this - what an example it makes to others that they must obey the rules and not flout the Law of the land!

But does this case not also demonstrate the traditional British hypocrisy that exists in our Establishment - how a judge will quite happily chastise the weak, while the strong go unpunished?

I commented in my last post about the case involving Mark Kennedy, in which the CPS deliberately concealed evidence in order to gain a conviction. What does that case say about the respect shown by the Crown Prosecution Service for the Judicial System?

I believe the Kennedy case demonstrated a blatant institutionalized contempt of Court, far more insidious than anything Joanne Fraill may have been guilty of. But will heads role at the CPS over the Kennedy case? Will anybody go to prison for that contempt of Court? I doubt it very much, because these guys probably went to the same public school, or meet in the same Lodge with their trousers leg rolled up. It is another world when you are on that side of the fence!

I have often complained that evidence was falsified at my own trial - I call that perverting the course of Justice, but the CPS were again responsible for that abuse. I accuse the CPS of contempt of Court for deliberately placing a false case before the jury, knowing that this would lead to my conviction. Luckily I have the ability to analysis what they did and have discovered the false evidence by my own efforts. To the discredit of the CPS - they have never acknowledged that they did anything wrong. Nobody will face charges for lying in Court or concealing evidence in my case. The CPS's unprofessional acts are ignored, and the evidence brushed under the carpet.

The CPS is further implicated in presenting false evidence to the jury in the trial of Daniel James. In trying to help Daniel I published parts of important witness statements, from witnesses that the Prosecution would not be calling because they would assist the Defence case. Shortly after this act I was warned that I was in contempt of Court, and that both I and Daniel could be prosecuted. Apparently my publication of these witness statements was put to the judge in the case. However, I stood firm and decided not to remove the post from my blog, and it is still there to this day.

Why do you think I was not prosecuted for contempt of Court? I can only conclude that raising this issue would have brought the whole basis for the case against Daniel into the open. I would certainly have used in my Defence that Daniel was being unfairly tried, and this would have raised serious doubts about the evidence against him. Also, the way Daniel was being tried in a Civilian Court, when he had requested a Court Martial.

Just as I always thought, "Justice" is manipulated to support those with the power in our country. The small guy only wins when he has the evidence to embarrass the wig wearing class of judges and barristers.

08 June 2011

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) concealed evidence in the Mark Kennedy case, involving the plan to shut down the Ratcliffe-on-Soar power station in Nottingham in 2009. This was discussed on the BBC2 Newsnight programme tonight and on the BBC website today. Mark Kennedy was in fact an undercover police agent pretending to act as an environmental campaigner.

It seems unbelievable that the CPS would behave in such a way by concealing evidence, as this is tantamount to perverting the course of Justice. But it is clear that the CPS was planning to convict the environmental activists involved, despite knowing that their organisation (the CPS) was withholding key evidence, as explained in the Guardian newspaper - many thanks to Paul Lewis and Rob Evans!! The Police knew all about the plans concerning the power station, because they had a recording of the meeting at the Iona Primary School where the campaigners met on Easter Monday 2009.

This may be big news to those naive enough to believe that the CPS is acting in the interests of Justice. But to people like myself this is simply confirmation that the CPS exists to convict those targeted by Government agencies as undesirable.

In August 1992, just days following my arrest for espionage, it was brought to the attention of the CPS that the key document in my case had been made obsolete in 1984. I only discovered this in 2007, despite efforts to prevent this information becoming known to myself and my Member of Parliament Andrew Mackinlay. The CPS had therefore concealed this evidence for many years, and they conspired to present an alternative story to the jury at my trial in October 1993, when it was claimed that that the document had in fact been used on British ALARM missiles deployed in the Gulf War of 1991.

This evidence that an obsolete document from 1984 was used to produce ALARM missiles in the early 1990s is plainly false, but the CPS cleverly used Professor Meirion Francis Lewis, an MoD scientist from Malvern, to claim that the document had been used on ALARM missiles during that war. He explained to the jury that the missile was vital to protecting the lives of British servicemen, and that the obsolete 1984 document would have enabled Iraqis to jam the missile and prevent it from working.

Perhaps many people will say: "that is OK, it doesn't matter as long as the guilty are convicted". However, this was the main evidence used at my trial to identify that I had handled sensitive material, and so it was crucial to my Defence that I had not dealt with military secrets at the time of my arrest. If a real expert had been called to give evidence at my trial, then it would have been made clear to the jury that the document could not have been used on ALARM missiles in the 1991 Gulf War.

The CPS chose to call a non-expert at my trial - Professor Lewis - and they used him to make false assertions about that document. I would call this perverting the course of Justice, and I would say that Professor Lewis knowingly committed perjury when he made his claims in Court. Will anybody listen to this? Is the CPS above the Law? Perhaps all those who know the truth at the CPS are merely liars and conspirators.

All I know is that the CPS acted unprofessionally in my case, and this MarkKennedy case shows they also acted unprofessionally in that case as well. How many cases does it take to prove that the CPS in unprofessional?